Automotive Deals HPCC Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Pink Floyd Fire TV Stick Health, Household and Grocery Back to School Handmade school supplies Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Segway miniPro
Customer Discussions > History forum

A Place for Pro Israel posters II

This discussion has reached the maximum length permitted, and cannot accept new replies. Start a new discussion

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 2801-2825 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jul 10, 2012 12:08:37 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 29, 2012 10:23:29 PM PDT
Aluf B. says:
Hi Jeff:

Good to hear from you directly. We do have the issue of the Vatican trying to declare Jerusalem an independent city controlled solely by the Vatican. That was a League plan, under the Mandate, and also a UN plan when the different plans were made prior and later to 1947, and the November approval of the State of Israel, born in 1948. This idea of complete Christian control has died, but this new Pope is reviving that. Fat chance.

I have documents that talk about it. that the Vatican has always wanted this "solution." They never believed that Jews will give freedom religion as a State in 1948. We did and do give freedom of religion.

Due to the wars the Vatican "plan" never succeeded and never will.

Maybe, Oh Jerusalem by La Pierre and Collins has the information you are looking for.

I also recommended to you the apologia of the Church regarding their behavior in the interwar years. It intersects with making Christianity Universal again by Pius XI and XII and that included Jerusalem. Cymet talks tangentially about it.
Kertzer might also have information, but I truly do not know any specific book that has tried to investigate this unique embarrassment in toto.
When the situation was being finalized, embassies chose Tel-Aviv exactly for this, not knowing what the future will bring,the Vatican's response, and how Israel would hold fast that it belongs to Jews to Jews.

The Church of St Peter is in Rome and the Vatican holds sway on this. That is their purview, not Israel at all. Granted Jesus lived and died as a Jew -and his history is there in the Galilee area,but he did not start Christianity.

I hope this helps you. If you give me more specifics about what you are looking for, I might have more answers for you.



Posted on Jul 10, 2012 7:46:16 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:
Erev Tov Israel !

Looks like pointing out to the UN and other organizations like "UNESCO" the real history and intent of the pointless. Or is it? And how would one go about making those organizations, or any other anti-Israel group aware of those facts? How can one reach them and educate them, or are they so against that nothing anyone can say or show would change their minds?

Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Who Is Being "Intransigent"? No Peace, No Recognition, No Negotiations, No Problem
Michael Curtis..
Gatestone Institute..
09 July '12..

Forty-five years after the Six Day War, declassified transcripts were released this June of the Israeli cabinet and government committee meetings in the days after war that ended on June 10, 1967. The documents provide a breathtaking insight into the efforts of Israeli leaders to reach a peace settlement with the countries and groups which had been at war with Israel. The evidence of the hard work and the varied opinions on the part of the Israeli ministers, all eager to reach a peace treaty and an understanding with the Palestinians and Arab states, presents a revealing contrast to the long-term refusal of the Arab parties to come to the negotiating table -- an attitude that was reiterated at the summit meeting of the Arab League on September 1, 1967 in Khartoum, Sudan. As has now been revalidated by the declassified transcripts, the Israelis were ready to negotiate land for peace; the Arab leaders instead issued their statement of the three "nos:" no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel -- an unconditionally negative position taken by Arab leaders that still persists.

The Arab and Palestinian intransigence, the refusal to accept a peace agreement, has a long history and is all too familiar. In 1922 the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine was officially established. Under it a Jewish Agency, set up in 1929, and composed of representatives of world Jewry, would assist the British administration in establishing the Jewish National Home in Palestine. The Jewish Agency then organized an infrastructure of political and social institutions that became the basis for the state of Israel. The Arabs refused the offer to create a similar Agency.

In 1922 the Arab leaders who refused to participate with the Jews in any plan or in a joint legislature, in which anyone other than the Arabs would have been the majority; rejected the proposal for a Palestinian Constitution with a Legislative Council in which the Arabs would have formed the majority, and boycotted the election for the Council.

In 1937 the Arab Higher Committee rejected the idea of two states, first officially proposed by the British Peel Commission Report. The Report had recommended a Jewish state in about 20 percent of Palestine, about 5,000 square kilometers, while most of the rest was to be under Arab sovereignty. The Report also suggested a transfer of land and an exchange of population between the two states. The Peel Commission Report was accepted, in principle, by the Jewish Agency, even though it meant that the Jewish state would be a small one, but it was totally rejected by the Arab Higher Committee, which called for a single state in all of Palestine.

In 1939, in the last attempt before World War II, to reach some agreement, the British Colonial Secretary organized a Round Table Conference in London that February. Failure was inevitable: the representatives of the five Arab states and the Arabs in Mandatory Palestine who were present refused any direct contact or discussion with the Jewish representatives -- even to sit in the same room with them.

The Arabs also refused to accept United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181(II) of November 29, 1947, which adopted the recommendation of the UN Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) that Western Palestine -- the area outside of Jordan -- be partitioned into two states, one Jewish, one Arab, with an internationalized Jerusalem as a corpus separatum, or separate body. The Jewish state would have about 55 percent of the area, but not the historic areas of Judea and Samaria. The Resolution was accepted by the Jewish leaders, but rejected by the Palestinian Arabs and by six of the seven member states -- Jordan being the exception -- of the Arab League, which at that time had replaced the League of Arab States.

Arab refusal to enter into peace negotiations persists to this day, inflexible as ever. The Palestinians decline to enter into negotiations with Israel unless Israel first accepts the "pre-1967 borders" (borders that have never existed; they are merely the armistice line of where the fighting stopped in 1949), agrees to Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state, and ends all construction in areas acquired by Israel as a result of the 1967 war.

In the Six Day War of June 1967, Israel achieved a remarkably rapid victory over its Arab opponents; it left Israel in control of the Sinai Peninsula, the Golan Heights, Gaza which had been ruled by Egypt, the Jordan River, the Suez Canal, and the West Bank, so named by Jordan which had "annexed" the area despite almost unanimous international disapproval.

The Israeli documents just released also show among Israeli leaders a startling readiness to compromise, which contrasts with the total disinclination of Arabs and Palestinians to compromise. The documents show clearly that, while there were acute differences among the Israelis about the fate of the territories captured in 1967, almost all Israelis were eager to trade land for peace.

The discussions and proposals were not initially intended to be policy proposals; they were directives to Israel's Foreign Minister, Abba Eban, who was participating in New York in the Special Session of the UN General Assembly, called to resolve the Israeli-Arab conflict. The ministerial discussions have to be put in the context of Israeli concern about any UN action after the memory of at least two issues. The first occurred when Israel was forced to withdraw from the Sinai after the Suez war of 1956 and had to rely there on United States guarantees and the UN Emergency Force (UNEF), which proved ineffective. The second was the speedy compliance in May 1967 of U Thant, Secretary-General of the UN, without the required approval of the UN General Assembly, to accede to Nasser's demand that the UNEF troops in the Sinai be withdrawn. The Israeli ministers feared that pressure would again be exerted on the state as in 1956 and May 1967, leaving Israel vulnerable.

It is also relevant that the Israeli government was a unity one under Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, and included members of Gahal (Menachem Begin and Yosef Safir) and the Rafi party (Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan). Not surprisingly, there were strong differences of opinion on the issues of security, borders, refugees, and water -- all of which prevented agreement.

Consensus was reached, however, on some issues. First, Israel should withdraw from captured territories only if the Arab states agreed to make peace and end the boycott of Israel. Most important, Israel would return the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt and the Golan Heights to Syria in return for either a peace treaty or strong security guarantees. The Israeli cabinet also agreed that east Jerusalem would not be returned to Jordan, which had ruled it; that Egypt had no greater claim to Gaza than Israel had, and that Jordan had no greater claim to the West Bank than Israel had, as all three countries had acquired the areas through war.

Some ministers thought that the demand for peace treaties was unrealistic. In the desperate effort to find positions that would both lead to negotiation and also also protect the state of Israel, they grappled with a variety of contradictory alternatives: control over the Gaza Strip, freedom of navigation in the Strait of Tiran; demilitarization of the Sinai and of the Golan Heights; control of the sources of the Jordan River; rule over the West Bank; end of any Israeli rule in the West Bank; military rule during a transition period; and self-rule for the Arab inhabitants of the West Bank while Israel still concerns itself with foreign affairs and national security.

Although there were differences on the issues of the destiny of the West Bank, and on whether peace treaties should be based on international frontiers, ministers all spoke of peace with security arrangements. The positive answer to the security issue was finally approved by a majority of one, 10 to 9: it was decided that a peace agreement should ensure freedom of navigation in the Strait of Tiran, the Gulf of Aqaba, and the Suez Canal; the freedom of flight over them, and the demilitarization of the Sinai Peninsula.

The formula agreed to by unanimity on June 19, 1967 was that "Israel proposes the conclusion of peace treaties with Egypt and Syria on the basis of the international frontiers and Israel's security needs." This proposal was presented to both Egypt and Syria, but no positive response came from either. Instead, the Arab Summit leaders at Khartoum announced on September 1, 1967 the three "nos."

As a result of Khartoum, Prime Minister Eshkol wrote a month later, "I doubt whether the government would approve the decision of June 19 exactly as it stands." In view of the continuing Arab leaders' refusal to negotiate, the decision did indeed become invalid.

What these newly released Israeli documents show in dramatic fashion is the eagerness of all the Israeli leaders, no matter how they differed on specific issues, to reach peace agreements with their Arab neighbors. If there is any hope for peace at this time among the Palestinians, they might wish to reconsider.


Michael Curtis is author of Should Israel Exist? A Sovereign Nation under Attack by the International Community.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 10, 2012 7:49:40 AM PDT
jeffesq613 says:
Thank you for the suggestions.

BTW, are you completely recovered from your eye surgeries?

Posted on Jul 10, 2012 7:52:25 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
For the Record: Settling Truths
JPost Editorial..
09 July '12..

After nearly six months of investigations, three legal experts known colloquially as "the outpost committee" - a government-appointed advisory body - submitted some clear-cut conclusions.

For instance, the trio - former Supreme Court Justice Edmond Levy, former Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker and former Deputy President of the Tel Aviv District Court Tehiya Shapira - found that the hundreds of thousands of patriotic, productive Israeli citizens living in Judea, Samaria and the Golan Heights are not criminals, as many of Israel's adversaries - and allies - would argue.

They also found that the 45-year-old settlement project, which has reunited the Jewish people to land resonating with Jewish history dating back thousands of years, cannot in any way be construed as an international crime.

The three men's argument, backed up by their intimate knowledge of international law, is based on a few simple facts.

First, the British Mandate, which came into effect in September 1922 after being ratified by the League of Nations, called for the creation of "a national home for the Jewish people" in the territory west of the Jordan River, including Judea and Samaria.

Second, the 1947 UN Partition Plan for Palestine never replaced the British Mandate as intended. It was accepted by the Jewish community in Palestine represented by the Jewish Agency, but was rejected by both the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee and by the states belonging to the Arab League.

Third, in the wake of Israel's War of Independence, when first local Palestinian militias and later the combined armies of Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon tried but failed to snuff out the Jewish state. Jordan seized control of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and parts of Jerusalem, but its sovereignty over these areas was never recognized by the international community.

Fourth, after the Six Day War, when once again the combined armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan, with the help of numerous other countries and organizations - including the PLO - tried and failed to wipe Israel off the map, Israel found itself in control of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, along with the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights.

In 1988, Jordan ceded its claims to the West Bank to the PLO. But these so-called claims were less substantial than Israel's for a number of reasons. First, the British Mandate never recognized Jordan's right to the land west of the Jordan River.

Also, Jordan seized the territory in an aggressive offensive against the fledgling Jewish state. And the newly created Jordanian state - essentially a British construction - had absolutely no historical ties to Judea and Samaria, while for Jews, it is the cradle of Jewish civilization and statehood from the biblical era.

Far from "occupied," the status of Judea and Samaria - if one is being generous with regard to Palestinian demands - can at best be described as sui generis.

The territory enjoys a unique status in international law as land that has never been unequivocally set aside for a specific people by the international community.

Even UN Resolution 242, which introduced the "land-for-peace" formula, calls on Israel to withdraw from "territories" in exchange for peace with its neighbors, but not all territories.

It was clear to the international community immediately after the Six Day War that Israel would retain an undetermined portion of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. (Israel has since magnanimously ceded the Gaza Strip to the Palestinians.) Unfortunately, the outpost committee's conclusions are not so obvious to everyone. Just three months ago, for instance, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, in response to moves by Israel to legalize outposts, declared that all settlement activity was "illegal." Ban's position reflected the general perception of most of the international community and certain segments of the Israeli Left.

Unsurprisingly, Levy, Baker and Shapira might not succeed in convincing Israel's detractors that settlements are legal and the men, women and children who populate them are law-abiding citizens by any criterion.

But at least the plain truth has now been reiterated - for the record. And it should be officially recognized as such by the government.


Posted on Jul 10, 2012 8:04:17 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Elder Responds: Zionism - The movement for self-determination of the Jewish people
10 July '12..

From the "Report of the Working Group on Israeli/Palestine Policy." (United Church of Canada):

4.1 Israel came into existence following recognition of the horrors of the Holocaust. There was wide support throughout the world for the creation of a Jewish homeland.

While many of the assumptions of this working group are problematic in and of themselves, Elder of Ziyon has taken the time to focus on this one particularly egregious supposition, with a short but powerful essay in response.

Elder of Ziyon:

The implication is that Israel's history begins in 1947.

My response:

Zionism is the movement for self-determination of the Jewish people.

That Jews are a people is beyond dispute. Jews have been considered a nation by the Jewish people themselves as well as by all of the other nations, whether those nations were friendly or not, since before the days of King David. In 1 Chronicles 17 the Bible itself asks rhetorically of G-d, "Who is like Your people Israel, a unique nation in the world?"

Even before the term Zionism was coined, Jews have been returning to their ancestral lands in the Land of Israel for many centuries. Sometimes individually, often in groups, Jews have risked their lives to return to their Land. Many of them, particularly the communities of Jerusalem and Hebron, essentially never left.

This return to Zion accelerated in the mid-18th century as Jews became more organized in their nationalism. Many Christians supported this movement as well, decades before Theodor Herzl or the First Zionist Congress.

A high point of this nationalist movement came in 1919, when Britain's Lord Balfour declared that the British government "favour[s] the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people." In the following decades, the Jews of Palestine built up all of the institutions of a nation, from literally nothing.

All of this happened before the horrors of the Holocaust.

While the Holocaust may have provided an incentive for the nations of the world to understand why a Jewish state was necessary, it was not what created the state of Israel. Indeed, even the UN resolution that called for a second division of Palestine (the first one occurred when TransJordan, formerly Eastern Palestine, was partitioned from the lands on the western side of the Jordan) was not the legal basis for the state of Israel, as it was not legally binding and the Arab nations did not accept it.

Israel exists today both because of the two millennia longing for the Jewish people to return to Zion and because the Palestinian Jews managed to successfully resist a war of annihilation unleashed by every one of her Arab neighbors. The Jewish state was not created; it was reborn.

So it is very deceptive, and indeed insulting, to describe the beginnings of the State of Israel in terms of the slaughter of six million Jews, It began over three thousand years ago, and return to the land of Israel has been the focal point of every Jew for generation after generation.

The State of Israel is not a state built out of guilt or pity. It is a state built on centuries of dreams, thousands of lives and millions of tears.

Posted on Jul 10, 2012 8:20:06 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

Part 1

Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Chief Author and Catalyst: Digging up Arafat's Lebanon crimes
Robert Werdine..
The Times of Israel..
09 July '12..

The recent decision to exhume the corpse of Yasir Arafat from the bowels of the earth, which coincides with the 30th anniversary of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon this summer, an invasion of which Yasir Arafat can be said without controversy to be the chief author and catalyst, has set me to remembering the fate of the many thousands of innocents who still lie buried there on behalf of his not inconsiderable efforts to put them there.

This unseemly recent initiative to retrieve the one-time PLO Chairman from his earthly slumber, incidentally, has also further set me to pondering some of the particulars that characterized this strange and terrible war, one of which occurred in the blue skies over the Bekaa Valley with lightning like alacrity, and the other down on the ground which mired a nation in a protracted, 18-year quagmire.


On the afternoon of June 9, 1982, Israeli Air Force F-4 Phantom fighter-bombers began demolishing the Soviet built Syrian SA-2, SA-3, and SA-6 surface to air missile batteries concentrated in the West Bekaa Valley of Lebanon with virtual impunity, 17 out of 19 being destroyed within 10-20 minutes.

The following morning, the F-4's returned to dispatch the remaining two, and the Syrians scrambled some 60 of their Soviet-made MiG-21 and MiG-23 fighters to take the Phantoms out and establish Syrian air superiority of the Bekaa. The IAF tracked them the moment they left their runways, and got their birds in the air within minutes. The Israelis flew in a carefully layered formation of American-made F-15 Eagle fighters, with their superb look-down capability and sophisticated radar, flying at 30,000 ft, and American-made F-16 Falcon and their own Kfir fighters flying below them, where their smaller-bore radars worked best on targets silhouetted against the sky.

As the Syrian fighters flew into the valley at about 2:15pm, they were hit by a hail storm of electronic jamming, courtesy of an E-2C ECM reconnaissance craft that was directing the Israeli fighters to their soon-to-be downed prey. The Syrian pilots, who almost totally relied on ground control, were now cut off and began to flounder. Then the Israelis arrived at the scene, and the turkey shoot began. The Soviet made MiG-21 and MiG-23's were simply no match for the American made F-15's and F-16's, and their airborne radars and air-to-air missiles were found to be even more inferior. Even worse, the Syrian pilots were using rigid, unimaginative Soviet tactics of flying in massed groups designed to destroy enemy formations by shock, weight of numbers, and closeness of formation.

Vectored by the E-2C's, the Israeli F-15's and F-16's put 25 Syrian MiG fighters and 3 helicopters to the bottom of the Bekaa, and the following day downed another 18. By the end of June 1982, the Israelis had shot down 85 Syrian Mig's-19% ofSyria's total combat planes. 40 had fallen to American-made F-15 Eagles, 44 by American-made F-16 Falcons, and one had been downed by an American-made F-4 Phantom. Not a single Israeli fighter plane was lost in air combat. In three days the Israeli Air Force had routed the Syrian Air Force in one of the most lopsided air battles in military history.

If only the war being waged on the ground could have been conducted with such surgical swiftness and decision.

The war in Lebanon was a tragedy for both Lebanon and Israel, two nations that, left to their own devices, had no quarrel and no reason to go to war. From Israel's perspective, it was not an unnecessary war, but it was less necessary than the previous wars had been when the life of the nation hung in the balance. The PLO attacks in the previous years were certainly a serious national-security threat, if not an existential one (though the border had been relatively quiet since the summer of 1981, there were, however, over 240 terrorist attacks by the PLO on Israelis, in Israel, the territories, and abroad).

That some response to this long campaign of terror and provocation was justified seems obvious; no sovereign state could or should be expected to suffer such attacks in silence and inaction. That the Israeli invasion met criteria for "just war" theory should go without saying. Whether the course of action the Israelis did take was wise, has long been the subject of debate. However, all one really has to do is ask what the United States would do if such a situation existed on its northern or southern borders. The question answers itself.

One thing, however, is certain: that Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon could have ever thought they could tame the sectarian furies of Lebanon and install a friendly regime in its place was a dangerous and costly fantasy. They expelled the PLO only to watch Hezbollah sprout up in their stead, saw their transient "alliance" with the double-dealing Phalangists slowly evaporate, and merely allowed the Syrians to strengthen their murderous grip on Lebanon as their vassel/slave state, where their depravities there far exceeded the worst excesses of the Israeli invasion and occupation combined many times over. It was all in vain.

But that, of course, is being wise after the event, hindsight being the prerogative of readers and writers of history. Who knew what to do at the time? And who are we to gainsay the decisions that were made? What were the alternatives? To do nothing?

No one should whitewash the tragedy of the Israeli invasion for the peoples of Lebanon, but no one should whitewash the far greater role played by the PLO, the Syrians and others in provoking the invasion and the innocent blood that was on their hands in the course of it, or, for that matter, long before it. Indeed, no one did more to upset Lebanon's fragile sectarian balance than did Arafat and the PLO, who transferred to Lebanon all of the death, destruction, and chaos that they had previously been conferring upon Jordan, (from whom they had been violently ejected in 1970), and whose attacks on northern Israel, like Hezbollah attacks later on, brought nothing but conflict and chaos to southern Lebanon, and the West Bekaa.

Life's brevity forbids a complete inventory of all of the depravities committed by Arafat and the PLO during their tenure in Lebanon. I shall, for my purposes here, mention but a few representative examples: the massacres at Damour and Tel-al Zaatar.

There is a grim, unintended irony at the prospect of presently exhuming Arafat's corpse; for it was at the town of Damour on January 20, 1976 that Arafat and his terrorist thugs committed an act of mass exhumation unique in the sordid annals of tomb desecration. The PLO first butchered some 584 of the town's civilians, then desecrated the Christian cemetery there, digging up coffins, robbing the dead, opening tombs and vaults and scattering bodies and skeletons about the graveyard. Inside a local church, a beaming portrait of Arafat and his AK-47 toting guerrillas was placed over the altar.

At Tel al-Zaatar on August 12, 1976, Arafat's PLO first subjected the city to an unrestrained orgy of rape, mutilation and murder, then leveled the village, and finally butchered 2-3000 civilians in cold blood in a ferocious artillery barrage while they were trying to escape. As John Bulloch, The Daily Telegraph correspondent in Beirut at the time wrote,

"In their bitterness the Palestinian commanders ordered their artillery to open up on the fringes of the camp with the ostensible objective of hampering the attackers and helping those inside; instead the shells were landing among the hundreds who had got through the perimeter and were trying to escape. When they were told of this, the Palestinians made no attempt to lift their fire: they wanted martyrs".

Posted on Jul 10, 2012 8:21:27 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:
Part 2

Robert Fisk, who was and is no friend of Israel, wrote,

"When Arafat needed martyrs in 1976, he called for a truce around the besieged refugee camp of Tel el-Zaatar, then ordered his commanders in the camp to fire at their right-wing Lebanese Christian enemies. When, as a result, the Phalangists and "Tigers" militia slaughtered their way into Tel el-Zaatar, Arafat opened a "martyrs' village" for camp widows in the sacked Christian village of Damour. On his first visit, the widows pelted him with stones and rotten fruit. Journalists were ordered away at gunpoint."

In another interview, published May 30, 2002, Fisk recalled,

"Arafat is a very immoral person, or maybe very amoral. A very cynical man. I remember when the Tal-al-Zaatar refugee camp in Beirut had to surrender to Christian forces in the very brutal Lebanese civil war. They were given permission to surrender with a cease-fire. But at the last moment, Arafat told his men to open fire on the Christian forces who were coming to accept the surrender. I think Arafat wanted more Palestinian "martyrs" in order to publicize the Palestinian position in the war. That was in 1976. Believe me that Arafat is not a changed man."

Fisk also wrote of the PLO during the siege of Beirut of 1982:

"There was still, even now, an inability within the PLO to admit that the Palestinian presence in Lebanonhad contributed to the nation's agony. Arafat and his colleagues blithely continued to associate the Phalangists with the forces of "imperialism," as part of the international conspiracy with which the Arab regimes had always been obsessed. This only helped to encourage the political and religious division of Lebanon.

True, the Phalangists were now collaborating with the Israelis, but the contempt with which the Palestinian guerillas had treated the Lebanese was almost subconscious and long preceded the 1982 invasion...The trouble in West Beirut was that many Palestinians acted as if they did own this sector of the city. Most [residents of Beirut] would have been as happy as the Israelis to see the PLO leave, providing the guerillas were not replaced by Phalangist militiamen from East Beirut." ("Pity The Nation: The Abduction of Lebanon," (1990), p.290)

Fisk might also have added that the PLO had also made extensive preparations to bomb Israeli population centers with both rockets and terrorist attacks, and, in the siege of West Beirut of 1982, they inducted child soldiers into military service, deliberately placed military targets next to schools, mosques, hospitals, churches, and apartment buildings (just like their Hamas and Hezbollah prodigies would later on), and Arafat warned that if the Israelis threatened to break into West Beirut, the PLO "would simultaneously blow up some 300 ammunition dumps and bring holocaust down on the city."


The Israeli involvement in Lebanon, in fact, was a mere part of a conflict bitterly raging between a whole host of other factions: between Sunni and Shi'a Muslims, both against Christians, the Druze against the Phalangists, the Maronites and the Phalangists and the inter-rivalry of their various militias, the PLO against the Phalangists, the Syrians against the PLO, and the rivalries and turf wars between the various groups within the PLO. The conflicts, mini-conflicts and turf struggles that destroyed and destabilized Lebanon had actually very little to do with Israel, and predated their involvement. In Lebanon, every man's hand was raised against the other, and all against the stranger.

Some 130,000 to 250,000 people were killed (more than 100,000 before the 1982 invasion), hundreds of thousands dislocated and dispossessed, and more than a million people wounded in this civil war, minus any Israeli involvement. Over the years there have been a lot of very, very, bad actors who have passed through the revolving door of the Land of the Cedars, and I hardly think it an exaggeration to say that the late, soon-to-be exhumed Yasir Arafat was among the worst of them. Not by a long shot.

This is all of more than just academic interest to me.Lebanon is my mother's ancestral homeland. Her grandfather came to America from the town of Mashghara in West Bekaa around the turn of the century, and her maternal grandfather came from an area around there at around the same time.

(Both, I am told, were seeking to elude conscription in the Ottoman army. My maternal great grandfather, Sharif Mohammed, also helped found one of the very first mosques built in North America here in my home town of Michigan City,Indiana in 1923).

All my life I have heard tales of Lebanon. The beauty of the country, and the warm, generous hospitality of its people. Several of my uncles have visited our relatives there in Mashghara and Bint J'Bail, and have told me of the relatives we still have living there, relatives I have never met. Someday, when Lebanon is truly free, I hope I can go there and meet them. Insh'allah

God only knows what horrors they have seen over the years.

Today both Gaza and South Lebanon have been converted into defacto military fortresses by paramilitary terrorist groups wedded to lunatic ideologies of violent jihad and martyrdom. When not oppressing and torturing their subjects, the bulk of their resources and activities are almost solely dedicated to the next round of martyr-making with Israel. They are merchants of death, and nothing but. They worship it, preach it, practice it, and industriously instill it into their youth as if nothing else in the world mattered. All for Jihad. Jihad, Jihad, Jihad. For this, they will happily convert the whole of their dominions into rubble-strewn scrap-heaps of smoke and flame again and again.

This, more than anything else, is Arafat's true legacy. And may he rot for it.

First published in The Times of Israel as "Where he made his bones; digging up Arafat's Lebanon crimes"

Robert Werdine lives in Michigan City, Indiana, USA. He studied at Indiana University, Purdue University, and Christ Church College at Oxford and is self-employed. He is currently pursuing advanced degrees in education and in Middle Eastern Studies.

Posted on Jul 10, 2012 9:00:46 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

Obama Administration Slams Levy Report

US officials say the Levy Report's conclusion that Israel is not an 'occupier' in Judea and Samaria is a cause for 'concern'

AAFont Size
By Gabe Kahn
First Publish: 7/10/2012, 5:07 PM

The Obama administration on Tuesday criticized an Israeli panel that issued a report that Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria do not violate international law.

"We do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity and we oppose any effort to legalize settlement outposts," State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell told reporters whena sked about the Levy committee report.

The State Department is "concerned about it, obviously," Ventrell added.

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton will visit Israel later this month, and her team may raise the report's conclusions with officials in Jerusalem.

Former Israeli Supreme Court Justice Edmond Levy who headed the committee wrote in the 89-page report released late Sunday, "Israel does not meet the criteria of `military occupation' as defined under international law" in the Judea and Samaria.

The report, which calls for the legalization of all Jewish communities in what Jerusalem terms the 'disputed territories,' recommends allowing those who built homes on privately owned property to pay compensation to the alleged owners in lieu of eviction.

However, some nationalist activists have suggested Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu press the IDF Civil Authority to issue seizure orders for all land where Jewish communities sit, rendering them state lands.

The findings of the Levy committee are subject to the review and approval of Israeli Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu established the Levy committee in January after Jewish leaders in Judea and Samaria called for a response to the highly controversial 2005 Sasson Report on illegal outposts.

The Sasson report - commissioned by then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and released by former State Attorney's Criminal Division head Talia Sasson on 8 March 2005 - was considered highly subjective and left-oriented as soon as it was publicized. Those suspicions were validated when Sasson ran on the ultra-left Meretz party Knesset list several years after writing the report..

In addition to land classification problems, the Sasson report is strongly criticized for its conclusion that Jewish neighborhoods founded before the 6 December 2004 regulation government authorization to build in Judea and Samaria was required were "unauthorized."

Prior to the 2004 directive, all construction in Judea and Samaria fell under Government Resolution 150 from 2 August 1996, which stipulated that the Defense Minister had the authority to authorize new communities.

The vast majority of communities the Sasson Report defined as "unauthorized" had been given the green light by the Defense Ministry prior to 6 December 2004.

Officials close to Netanyahu say the history of controversy surrounding the report, as well as the fact that it was a lone opinion rather than a consensus of experts, required it be reconsidered.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 10, 2012 3:43:12 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 11, 2012 12:39:54 AM PDT
Aluf B. says:
Shalom Jeff:

BH' the word would be improving every day. Due to the doctor's vacation time and my husband's own conference, the complication for scheduling to take stitches out will be in August. Meanwhile, I am using just lubricant to help the eyes not be so red. Yet, I am driving, in the computer. What I still have a hard time is reading books since I can accommodate the print size. I am grateful BH' for the blessings, no complaints. Just a report of facts, as it is my way. I hope to have the rest of the time to heal to be ready for school.

Any more questions on the Vatican? I can answer them.
Thank you for asking about my health. :-)


In reply to an earlier post on Jul 10, 2012 3:46:02 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 11, 2012 12:33:46 AM PDT
Aluf B. says:
Shalom Sixties:

The best sentence is the last Sixties. A tsunami of tears,dreams and personal efforts of individuals- Jewish and not Jewish- who help this dream to come true. Most of that job is my area in the interwar period.

I hope all is well with you dear.

Have not heard from you in a long long time.


Posted on Jul 10, 2012 4:46:37 PM PDT
Sixties Fan says:
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Kushner - From Israel: Touching Bases
Arlene Kushner..
10 July '12..

Later today I am attending a press conference, which I hope to write about. And so here I want to briefly touch a variety of bases -- as there is so much that is transpiring.


Could we possibly have expected anything else? State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell offered this statement at a press conference:

"Obviously, we've seen the reports that an Israeli Government appointed panel [the Levy Committee] has recommended legalizing dozens of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but we do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity and we oppose any effort to legalize settlement outposts...We're concerned about it, obviously."

Well, "obviously." The US is going to be pressuring the Israeli government not to accept the report. State Department officials are scheduled to be here.

And so my friends, it's time for making your voices heard, please! In great numbers.

Write to Prime Minister Netanyahu now, before you forget.

Do it respectfully, keep it short, but convey a sense of conviction and strength:

Something like: "Mr. Prime Minister, at long last the Levy Committee has submitted recommendations regarding Jewish rights in Judea and Samaria that are just. Please, adopt these recommendations. Do what is right for Israel and the Jewish people. There is no pleasing the world in any event."

Do NOT copy this. It is a sample of the kind of thing that needs to be said in your own words.

Fax: 02-670-5369 (From the US: 011-972-2-670-5369)

E-mail: and also (underscore after pm) use both addresses

(More on the "settlements" and the UN below.)


Again, you can see my post on this for context:

PM Netanyahu has praised the work of the committee but has stopped short of making commitments to adhere to its recommendations. He says the Ministerial Committee on Settlements will be discussing it, but we should not slight the importance of his influence on the Committee's conclusions.


In any event Israel must do what is good for Israel and defend Jewish rights on the land. But all the more so is this the case when there is a man in the White House who is demonstrably not a friend of Israel (his protestations to the contrary not withstanding).

This from Haaretz yesterday (emphasis added):

"U.S. President Barack Obama has invited Egypt's newly elected Islamist president, Mohammed Morsi, to visit the United States in September, an Egyptian official said on Sunday, reflecting the new ties Washington is cultivating with the region's Islamists.

"'President Obama extended an invitation to President Morsi to visit the United States [the White House] when he attends the UN General Assembly in September,' Egyptian aide, Yasser Ali, said after Morsi met U.S. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns.

"Burns did not mention the invitation at a news conference earlier.

"Washington, long wary of Islamists and an ally of ousted President Hosni Mubarak, shifted policy last year to open formal contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood, the group behind Morsi's win."


There is still some confusion as to whether or not Morsi will be in Tehran for a summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in late August. But what is clear is that he will be traveling to Saudi Arabia -- tomorrow, actually. He is scheduled to meet with King Abdullah and visit Mecca.

This will be his first foreign visit and the Saudis, who are greatly at odds with Iran, are delighted by the prospect of this visit.


Morsi, I must add here, has now challenged the generals by calling back into session the parliament that had been dissolved by the ruling military council. See here for details:

Posted on Jul 10, 2012 4:53:06 PM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

EU Jewry Blasts Church of England's Anti-Israel Vote

British Jewry condemns Church of England's Synod for promoting "an inflammatory and partisan" anti-Israel program.

By Rachel Hirshfeld
First Publish: 7/10/2012, 9:59 PM

The representative organization of British Jewry has condemned the Church of England's Synod for choosing to "promote an inflammatory and partisan programme at the expense of its interfaith relations." (For A7's Giulio Meotti explaining the story behind the vote, click here.)

In a strongly worded statement, the president of the Board of Deputies expressed its concern over the decision at the Synod on Monday to pass a motion endorsing the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI), The Jewish Chronicle (JC) reported.

The EAPPI's website claims that it "brings internationals to the West Bank to experience life under occupation. Ecumenical Accompaniers (EAs) provide protective presence to vulnerable communities, monitor and report human rights abuses and support Palestinians and Israelis working together for peace."

"When they return home," the website claims, "EAs campaign for a just and peaceful resolution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict through an end to the occupation, respect for international law and implementation of UN resolutions."

The program had previously been described by the Board as the activities of "very partisan but very motivated anti-Israel advocates who have almost no grasp of the suffering of normal Israelis."

The resolution, which was overwhelmingly backed by delegates, called for support of the "West Bank" volunteer program.

Vice President of the European Jewish Congress, Vivian Wineman, said the Synod explained that there is a clear imbalance in the EAPPI program and noted that it does nothing to promote an understanding of the situation in the Middle East.

Even Wineman, who has been a Chairman of both Peace Now and the New Israel Fund of Great Britain, two organizations known for, what many deem to be anti-Israel agendas, has claimed that, "Members of Jewish communities across the country have suffered harassment and abuse at EAPPI meetings and yet Synod has completely dismissed their experiences."

"As the motion was being debated, it came to light that EAPPI had issued a publication, entitled `Chain Reaction,' which calls on supporters to stage sit-ins at Israeli Embassies, to hack government websites in order to promote its message and declares EAPPI's support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel," he continued.

"To hear the debate at Synod with references to `powerful lobbies,' the money expended by the Jewish community, `Jewish sounding names' and the actions of the community `bringing shame on the memory of victims of the Holocaust,' is deeply offensive and raises serious questions about the motivation of those behind this motion," Wineman added, according to the JC.

Posted on Jul 10, 2012 7:45:06 PM PDT
Sixties Fan says:
July 10, 2012 | 9:34 am

Anti-Semitism in Iran: Worse than you think

Posted by Karmel Melamed
Mohammad Reza Rahimi

In Tehran last month, during a ceremony marking the International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, Iran's current vice president, Mohammad-Reza Rahimi, launched an anti-Semitic tirade.

I am fluent in Farsi and understood 100 percent of what he said from watching his speech online. Rahimi blamed the spread of drugs on the teachings of the Talmud, claiming that "the Talmud teaches Jews how to destroy non-Jews and that 80 percent of America's wealth is in the hands of 6 percent of the world's Jewish population." Likewise, he blamed an unnamed Jewish gynecologist in America for once sterilizing 8,000 Native Americans, which he claimed was in accordance with the teachings of Talmud. At the same time, Rahimi went on to blame the Jews for a series of other world calamities, including the long laundry list that can, by and large, be found in the classic 1880s Russian anti-Semitic book "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion." (By the way, the Farsi copies of "Protocols" have long been best-sellers in Iran, with more than 400 pages added to the original 1880s Russian version.)

While the international media surprisingly gave substantial coverage to this vile speech made by an Iranian government official, making headlines worldwide, I was frankly not surprised to hear these comments from Rahimi. The truth of the matter is that 99.9 percent of the Iranian regime's officials make such anti-Semitic comments regularly and believe every single word that comes out of their mouths in public. Yet, what should worry the Western world is the vile anti-Semitic accusations made by supposed "reformists" and "green party" leaders in Iran's regime against one another or their opponents who also work in the Iranian government. The most classic and detrimental way Iranian government officials can attack one another is to claim that the "such and such official was born a Jew, or was once a Jew who converted to Islam, or his family was Jewish a generation ago and then converted." The "Jewish identity label" is thrown around as a type of public insult or verbal assault. Officials in Iran and in most Islamic nations use it against one another in smear campaigns. For one Iranian government official to call or accuse another government official of being Jewish is the equivalent of individuals or groups in the United States accusing an elected official in America of being a child molester or pedophile.

The result is that being referred to as "Jewish" has a very derogatory meaning in Iran. Perhaps the best examples of Iranian regime members being publicly "smeared" with the "Jewish identity label" have been Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his senior adviser Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei. On a regular basis in Iran, opponents of Ahmadinejad tell the public there's no doubt Ahmadinejad or his cronies are "bad or foolish" people - because only a "supposed Jew or one of Jewish blood could be so evil in the world." Another example of this "Jewish identity label" occurred during the 1990s and early 2000s, when Iran's former president Mohammad Khatami or other "reformists" in the regime regularly accused hated rival officials of having Jewish blood. (My blog piece in 2009 uncovered the bogus story circulating worldwide that Ahmadinejad supposedly had Jewish ancestry.)

This form of anti-Semitism in Iran may seem to most observers in the United States or Europe merely dirty mudslinging that occurs in Iranian politics. Yet just this type of anti-Semitism should raise a red flag to everyone in the free world, because one day, should the current regime in Iran collapse, the supposed "reformists" who spew this type of hate speech today against Jews could potentially use this type of anti-Semitism as an excuse to blame hardliners for Iran's destruction. At the same time, their comments could directly or indirectly fan some in the Iranian-Muslim population to lash out against the 10,000 to 25,000 Jews still living in Iran. No doubt both "reformists" and "hardliners" in Iran's regime would not want to accept credit for the failures and heinous crimes against humanity committed by the regime's current leaders, should the regime collapse one day. So, blaming the Jews for their own failures would be an ideal and classic scapegoat policy for them to pursue.

Finally, the only thing that should surprise anyone about Rahimi's speech was that he did not attack Israel or Zionism, as most Iranian officials typically do per the regime's policy. He went out of bounds and clearly attacked Jews and their religion, which reveals the Iranian regime's true hatred of Jews. The Iranian regime's propaganda English-language media outlets online quickly retranslated Rahimi's speech on their sites by replacing his references to Jews with references to Zionists. The regime's state-run news sites tried to do "media damage control" for Rahimi, but they failed miserably because his comments made in the Persian language can be translated by native Persian-language speakers who know that the words he said were insanely anti-Semitic. The Iranian regime still expects the world to remain stupid enough to believe their bogus propaganda and that they "love the Jews" and have "given freedom to the Jews" living in Iran today.


Karmel Melamed, an attorney, writes the "Iranian American Jews" blog at

Posted on Jul 10, 2012 7:56:23 PM PDT
J. Schwarz says:
Hi Rachel. Had a class today and we began to study King David and Solomon and how the king was too old and did not know his throne was being taken over by one of his sons. The prof. relates it like a family drama. But its fun. Then he goes into the actual writings and nuances that many people don't notice but explain the underlying motivations of their behavior. I am sure you would enjoy one of his lectures.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2012 12:38:36 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 29, 2012 10:25:48 PM PDT
Aluf B. says:
J. Schwarz:

I am sure I would truly enjoy those lectures. I enjoy Torah from B to Taf. We start the Canon with a Bet- logically.

The next best thing are your reports, since I now must take care of myself to be ready for school.

So kindly, can you go a little bit further on the nuances that we might not notice?

I am eager to learn always something new.


Posted on Jul 11, 2012 7:30:57 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:
Erev Tov Israel !

Tuesday, July 10, 2012It turns out the soccer player really was a member of Islamic Jihad
From AP:

Dozens of Islamic militants fired rifles in the air Tuesday in a rousing homecoming for a member of the Palestinian national soccer team who was released by Israel after being held for three years without formal charges.

The player, Mahmoud Sarsak, 25, had staged a hunger strike for more than 90 days to press for his release, winning support from international sports organizations.

Israel accused Sarsak of being active in the violent Islamic Jihad group, a charge he denied while in custody.

However, senior Islamic Jihad officials were present during a welcoming ceremony for him in Gaza City on Tuesday, and one of the group's leaders, Nafez Azzam, praised the soccer player as "one of our noble members."

Later Tuesday, as Sarsak approached his family home in the Rafah refugee camp, dozens of Islamic Jihad gunmen fired in the air from SUVs and motorcycles. Women waved black Islamic Jihad banners from nearby homes and streets were decorated with huge photos of the player.
By the way, news of Sarsak's release received modest attention in most Palestinian Arab media, but it was plastered all over Islamic Jihad's Palestine Today as well as their terror wing the Al Quds' Brigades newspaper, Saraya, with no fewer that four featured articles in each Islamic Jihad paper.

Now, why would Islamic Jihad be so much happier about Sarsak's release than, say, Hamas?

Here's the Al Quds Brigades poster celebrating Sarsak, in the section of its site dedicated to "Jihadist graphics":

Posted on Jul 11, 2012 7:39:25 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

Corruption Charges Fuel Move to Cut US Aid to PA

The PA said the US has warned it will cut aid if it goes to the UN again for recognition. In Congress, the PA is charged with corruption.

By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
First Publish: 7/11/2012, 12:56 PM

The Palestinian Authority said the Obama administration has warned it will cut aid if it goes to the United Nations again for recognition. In Congress, opposition to aiding the Palestinian Authority was fueled by charges that PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has "lined his pockets."

Khaled Mesmar, a Palestinian Authority official of the Political Committee of the Palestinian National Council, admitted on Tuesday that the United States has "threatened to cut off financial aid to the Palestinian Liberation Office in Washington if the Palestinian leadership submitted another membership bid to the United Nations."

He said the threat was delivered through official channels during a recent visit to Ramallah by an American envoy.

Mesmar said that the PA took the threats seriously but has not yet decided to go ahead with another appeal to the United Nations Security Council for membership, which would entail recognition of the Palestinian Authority as an independent country based on its own definition of borders.

Abbas dropped a bid last year when it was clear he would lose, although by one vote.

Mesmar also said that the Obama administration threatened to cut off aid unless it drops all pre-conditions for talking directly with Israel over the status and borders of the PA. Abbas has said "negotiations" with Israel can begin if Jerusalem stops all building for Jews in areas claimed by the Palestinian Authority. It wants the talks based on a foregone conclusion that it be granted its self-defined territorial borders.

Meanwhile, the House Foreign Affairs Committee held a subcommittee hearing Tuesday under the unwieldy name of "Chronic Kleptocracy: Corruption within the Palestinian Political Establishment."

In testimony posted live on its website, committee chairman Steve Chabot, a Ohio Republican, asserted that the West is making a mistake by looking at "the plight of the Palestinians in Gaza, but instead of highlighting the ways that the Hamas terrorist leadership mismanages the local economy or gives Israel justifiable cause for concern, we are told that an Israeli blockade is to blame.

"Similarly, instead of calling attention to the omnipresent and insidious corruption within the PLO and Fatah leadership in the West Bank, we are told that Israeli settlements, many of which will surely not be a part of any future Palestinian state, are the true problem."

He charged that reports indicate Abbas "line[s] his own pockets as well as those of his cohort of cronies, including his sons...who have enriched themselves with U.S. taxpayer money."

Elliott Abrams, former advisor to President George E. Bush and now a senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, told the subcommittee, "Listen to the words of the man who was charged with rooting out public corruption, Fathi Shabaneh, and who resigned in 2010:

`In his pre-election platform, President Abbas promised to end financial corruption and implement major reforms, but he hasn't done much since then. Unfortunately, Abbas has surrounded himself with many of the thieves and officials who were involved in theft of public funds and who became icons of financial corruption.'"

Abrams warned, "If we turn a blind eye to corruption, and to persecution of those who expose it, we are in a very real way contributing to the problem and undermining those Palestinians who wish to build public integrity into their system."

Posted on Jul 11, 2012 7:46:44 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

Democratic Politician Claimed No Jews Died in 9/11
By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
First Publish: 7/11/2012, 1:54 PM

A Missouri politician who was a local campaign manager for Obama claimed that no Jews died in the 9/11 attacks, then relectantly apologized.

Bangladesh native MD Rabbi Alam ['Rabbi" is part of his full name] said in a discussion on the topic "Was 9/11 a conspiracy" that September 11, 2001 was an "official holiday for all Jewish people [who] worked in the WTC (New York World Trade Center)" and that "not a single Jew was killed on that day."

In fact, it was not a Jewish holiday, and 200-400 Jews, including five Israelis, died in the twin suicide aerial attacks. The fatality count does not include hundreds of others who died in two other suicide aerial crashes, one on the Pentagon and the other in rural Pennsylvania, where the hostages crashed the plane before the terrorists could fly it to Washington.

Alam, running for Missouri Secretary of State, was cornered by a VIN News interviewer after the Washington Free Beacon reported his comments.

VIN's Rabbi Yair Hoffman told Alam in the interview that he personally knew many Jews who were killed, and asked Alam, "Are you saying that these people went into hiding or that his children, his father, and his brother are all lying and, in fact, he is still alive?"

Alam, who originally had confirmed his position, finally capitulated in the wake of emails and evidence that he was wrong,

He then made a strange turnabout, expressing outrage that such misinformation could appear.

The Free Beacon said Alam served as a "satellite campaign manager" for President Barack Obama in 2008 and now chairs the National Democratic Party Asian American Caucus, a Democratic National Committee-sponsored organization for Asian minorities.

The Missouri Right to Life Political Action Committee endorsed Alam for Secretary of State according to Family Security Matters.

The endorsement states that it "takes great care in choosing candidates to support in elections."

Alam's personal YouTube channel shows him speaking against the U.S. War on Terror, which he called "nothing but a horror suffering for us as an immigrant."

(vide video online)

Posted on Jul 11, 2012 7:50:30 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

Jewish Woman Rescued from Arab Village - after 28 Years
By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
First Publish: 7/11/2012, 3:36 PM

A dramatic rescue takes a Jewish woman and her two young children out of the clutches of a brutal Palestinian Authority Arab husband with whom she lived for 28 years.

The anti-missionary Yad L'Achim organization, which also works on behalf of Jewish women trapped in relationships with Arabs, revealed the extraordinary story, after "Dinah, the daughter of Leah," was safely back among Jews.

Dinah was born in the mixed Arab-Jewish city of Lod 48 years ago but became estranged from her family during an emotional crisis, which led her to a relationship with an Arab man.

Since then, she was declared as missing, and her family did not know whether she was dead or alive. At one point, Israeli authorities mistakenly thought they had identified her in a morgue.

She lived with her husband in a Palestinian Authority Arab village in the area of Tulkarm, east of Netanya. She said her husband traumatized her and once tied her to a tree for 13 hours, without food or water The husband said he wanted "everyone to see what will happen to you" if she were to leave the house with permission.

Three weeks ago, ties were suddenly re-established with her family, which finally had a sign that Dinah was still alive. They contacted Yad L'Achim officials, who were given her telephone number and other personal information that enabled them to go into action to rescue her.

When they first got in touch with Dinah, she begged them, "Get me back to my homeland."

With the help of Interior Minister Eli Yishai and the IDF, special permits were prepared for Dinah and her children to cross the checkpoint near Tulkarm after the rescue, which was carried out in strict secrecy.

This past Sunday evening, her husband gave Dinah 12 shekels to travel with her two children in a taxi to a clinic for medical care Monday morning.

In a pre-arranged scheme, she and her children got out of the cab shortly after it left the village and hurriedly got into a rescue vehicle that Yad Latham sent, with advance permission from a senior IDF officer. Soldiers at the checkpoint had been alerted to allow the vehicle to enter the Palestinian Authority for the rescue operation.

During the journey of nearly an hour to the checkpoint, Yad L'Achim instructed its workers to stop what they were doing and say Psalms for the safe return of Dinah.

The rescue vehicle returned to the checkpoint, and the soldiers confirmed they saw the mother and her two children in the rescue vehicle.

Once past the checkpoint, the vehicle stopped, and Dinah burst into tears, along with the soldiers.

The children begged her, "Mommy, promise us you never will go back there again."

One of Dinah's first actions was to take off her Muslim garb and tell Yad L'Achim officials, "Throw them in the trash can."

The organizations' social workers are treating her and she is staying at a secret location in central Israel, after having made contact with her family.

She filed a complaint with police against her Arab husband's brutality. Police said they doubted that Palestinian Authority police would take any action against her but added that if he steps one foot beyond the checkpoint, he will be arrested.

Posted on Jul 11, 2012 7:56:17 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

Posted on Jul 11, 2012 8:51:47 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

Winner: 'What We Talk About When We Talk About Anne Frank'

By Rachel Hirshfeld
First Publish: 7/11/2012, 5:52 PM

Jewish-American author Nathan Englander's short story collection titled "What We Talk About When We Talk About Anne Frank" won the 2012 Frank O'Connor International Short Story Award.

The panel of judges praised it as "powerful and resonant", and said that they were impressed by "the seasoned maturity shown by the author in stories multilayered in meaning and written in an austere, contemporary idiom applied to ancient ethnic themes".

"His prose, like the snow of good King Wenceslas, is deep and crisp and even, neither over-florid nor pedestrian," said judge and poet James Harpur. "Nathan Englander's stories are always well crafted, establishing a premise that has the promise of drama and tension: an upright citizen going to a peep show; a woman symbolically selling her child to a neighbour; the summer camp that begins to revive memories of a concentration camp; taking revenge on an antisemite bully."

The story from which the collection takes its title is a homage to Raymond Carver's "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" and portrays two Jewish couples playing "the Righteous Gentile game", which necessitates discussing which of their acquaintances would protect them in the event of a Holocaust, The Guardian explains.

The collection of stories won out over collections by Israeli writer Etgar Keret, as well as Sarah Hall and Kevin Barry.

The prize is funded by Cork City Council and was established by the Munster Literature Centre in memory of renowned short story writer Frank O'Connor.

This year, Englander also teamed up with Jewish-American author Jonathan Safran Foer to publish the "New American Haggadah," a more modern take on the traditional Passover Haggadah.

Posted on Jul 11, 2012 9:10:26 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:

Boeing to Market Israeli UAVs
By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
First Publish: 7/11/2012, 9:18 AM

Israel's Elbit Systems has soared into the international market with a new agreement with Boeing to market the company's Hermes UAVs, American military and defense media reported Monday.

The companies have signed a Memorandum of Understanding at the Farnborough Air Show in London. The agreement covers marketing and sales of Elbit's Hermes 450 and 900 UAS product lines.

The agreement gives Elbit a long-desired stronger foothold in the U.S. market.

Its Hermes 450 UAV are exported to several countries, including Britain, Singapore, Georgia and Brazil. It also is a principle part of the IDF's counterterrorist operations.

The larger Hermes 900 can carry larger payloads for extended missions and is often used for ground support and maritime patrol missions. "This partnership further expands and enhances Boeing's longstanding relationship with Elbit Systems to include unmanned products," said Debbie Rub, Boeing Missiles and Unmanned Airborne Systems vice president and general manager.

She said the Hermes UAVs will help Boeing supply needs by the United States and its allies.

Boeing and Elbit recently announced other strategic agreements relating to advanced fighter avionics and long-term cooperation providing helmet-mounted display sights for all Boeing's fighter planes.

Boeing earlier this year chose Elbit's Brazilian subsidiary to provide large cockpit displays for the F-15 and the F-18 fighters.

Posted on Jul 11, 2012 9:18:38 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:
(+Video) HamasCare: Blame Israel
Pesach Benson..
Honest Reporting/Backspin..
11 July '12..

Gaza's children deserve better health care, and I wish their medical care could somehow be separated from the security situation.

But if The Guardian's going to break out the violins, I think it's warped to film a video in - of all places - the Rantisi Pediatric Hospital for Children. The hospital's named for Abdel Aziz Rantisi, a Hamas terror leader and pediatrician who ultimately found himself on the wrong end of a 2004 Israeli air strike. One man's targeted assassination is another man's assisted martyrdom.

Here's The Guardian's video.

The Rantisi name represents everything warped about Palestinian health care. It doesn't take a surgeon general's warning to know that suicide bombings are bad for your health, but Dr. Rantisi dispatched them by the dozens. And The Guardian's own Rantisi obituary noted that he condoned killing Israeli children:

Once, the former pediatric doctor said he condoned the murder of Israeli children, if that would secure the future of young Palestinians.

Other great moments in HamasCare:

1) Wafa al Bis trying to blow herself up in an Israeli hospital
2) Hamas leaders hiding in bunkers under Shifa Hospital
3) Hamas stealing donated medicine
4) Inflating casualty counts
5) Freeloading Red Cross protection
6) Smuggling gunmen and rockets in ambulances
7) Abusing Israeli medical permits
8) Shelling the Erez crossing during a medical transfer.

Need I go on?


Posted on Jul 11, 2012 9:20:40 AM PDT
Sixties Fan says:
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Beinart, Young Jews and Israel
Elliott Abrams..
Pressure Points..
11 July '12..

The past year has seen a long debate about whether young American Jews are becoming alienated from Israel. This assertion was the central argument in an article and then a book by Peter Beinart, who argued that this is happening. As Beinart announces at his web site, "A dramatic shift is taking place in Israel and America....In the United States, the refusal of major Jewish organizations to defend democracy in the Jewish state is alienating many young liberal Jews from Zionism itself."

The book made quite a stir, as would be warranted if the facts were right. But now comes a new poll, conducted by the left-of-center group called the Workmen's Circle and published in the left-of-center Jewish newspaper The Forward. Unfortunately for Mr. Beinart, who has gotten an enormous amount of attention, speaking engagements, and media appearances from his thesis, his thesis is wrong.

"Young Jews are now more attached to Israel than the previous generation," the Forward article summarizes. Now, it can be anticipated that Beinart and others who take his view would respond that this reflects the attachment to Israel among the most religious young Jews. Not so:

The poll looked only at Jews who are not Orthodox and do not attend Jewish day school, thus reflecting the broader Jewish population and particularly the segment of the population that attends such programs as Birthright. It is these trips to Israel, and not a connection to Jewish life, which are being credited with the recent increase is Israel interest. "It seems that the attachment levels for the entire age cohort are elevated due in large part to the increasing number of people who have visited Israel," says Sociologist Professor Steven M. Cohen who, along with Professor Samuel Abrams, conducted the survey. A full 34% of the under-35 age group has been to Israel, compared with 22% of 35-44 year olds. The poll dubbed the effect the "Birthright bump" in data. Birthright Israel has sent nearly 300,000 Jews between the ages of 18 to 26 to Israel since 2000.

What remains to be explained is why such a flimsy thesis as Mr. Beinart's received, and receives, so much attention. I would argue that it is because he is saying two things many left-wing American Jews want to hear and want to believe: that the policies of a conservative government in Israel are alienating American Jews from that country, and that the leading American Jewish organizations are derelict in their duty to oppose such policies. The Workmen's Circle's new poll demonstrates that this is wishful thinking on their part. To repeat the poll's punch line again, "Young Jews are now more attached to Israel than the previous generation." Mr. Beinart should reflect on something my old boss the late Sen. Daniel P. Moynihan used to say: "You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts."


In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2012 10:55:07 AM PDT
jeffesq613 says:
You're welcome.
Discussion locked

Recent discussions in the History forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  History forum
Participants:  49
Total posts:  10000
Initial post:  Apr 30, 2012
Latest post:  Mar 31, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 5 customers

Search Customer Discussions